diligence at seed is mostly irrelevant … except for founder diligence across 400+ investments, the majority of the best seed outcomes were pivots. the company that got funded looked little like the company that broke out. hiring a consulting firm to do a month of diligence on the original business -- the results would have been completely irrelevant. so what are you actually underwriting at seed? the founding team. that's it. there's SO little business performance data that the team and maybe the category is all there is. this has a direct implication for LP diligence too. evaluating a seed fund the way you'd evaluate a growth fund -- thesis, sector focus, portfolio construction models -- misses the point. the question isn't "does this GP have the best analytical framework." the question is "does this GP have the pattern recognition to spot outlier founders at speed and the access to get into their rounds."